 I'm here in the ITU TV studio with Daniel Cavalcanti, advisor to the Brazilian Telecom's regulatory authority and chief negotiator with the Brazilian delegation at the recent World Telecommunications Policy Forum. Daniel, you're very welcome. The recent WTPF concluded with the successful endorsement of six opinions, but one of the big talking points of the conference was a proposal that the Brazilian delegation brought. Can you please give us an outline of this proposal and why it was such a talking point at the conference? OK. Brazil presented could have been a seventh opinion coming out of the WTPF. And it is based on our national experience where we have a vibrant multi-stakeholder environment for internet governance. In fact, it is reflected in the Secretary General's report as an input document to the WTPF. But we feel that the international level, we still seek full engagement of all governments as one of the stakeholders in this multi-stakeholder environment. And particularly, we would like to see more participation of developing countries and the least developed countries. So in that sense, Brazil presented a draft opinion that dealt with two main points. One is clearly presenting and defining the role of these governments in this multi-stakeholder environment. And the second is recognizing that many countries still lack this full participation that the ITU could play a role in capacity building for developing countries and particularly least developed countries so that they can actively participate in this multi-stakeholder environment at the international level. And can you give us an insight into the types of discussions that were held once you presented the proposal and how it evolved over the course of the conference and where we are now with your proposal and what might the future be for it? Okay, so from the outset, we had broad support in many continents. As soon as the draft opinion was introduced, a number of countries seek the floor and express their support. But we must recognize that others, although they saw merits in the proposal, they would like further refinements in the language and specific issues that were dealt with in this opinion. I might say that throughout the negotiations, we had an input document that resulted from the work of the IEG, where we had been conveners of this particular opinion and then resubmitted directly to the WTPF. And we were provided with an opportunity to, after consultations with those that were in favor and those that would see possibilities for improvements, we came up with the second draft text, which was then submitted to the floor. And again, we consulted directly with a number of parties, especially European Union, United States, those that had voiced more directly some concerns with the text. And in the end, I believe the consensus was that although we were not ready to approve a draft opinion at this point, that the issue was very much on the table and all were in agreement in that respect. And in fact, although not approved as an opinion, the forum did provide a way forward so that the issue can be further discussed. And you mentioned that there was concern among certain members of ITU and other participants that there wasn't enough participation from different countries in this very key issue of internet governance, which is only going to become more important. What are the main reasons, do you think, behind this relatively low level of participation at country level? And I think you mentioned particularly developing countries and what can be done about it. Well, there are all sorts of limitations, starting with logistics, that the forum, the fora, that do address the issue at the international level tend to meet at different places around the globe, which so many countries have limitations in terms of this participation. But there is also in terms of the expertise to deal with the issue and a full understanding of this environment that involves multiple forums, multiple stakeholders. So it is a complex environment. In fact, from the floor, we heard a lot from developing countries and a bit of their frustration about the possibility or even their ability to actually voice some of their concerns at the existing fora. That is not to say that these are not the adequate fora, it's just that the countries have not managed to achieve an adequate level of participation on an equal footing with other stakeholders in this complex international arena. And this week at the WTPF, while the opinion wasn't officially endorsed, it has certainly gained a lot of traction and a lot of support across all sectors and all stakeholders. What would your aspirations be for the future of this document going forward in terms of really defining the role of government in internet governance? Well, in the end, the question of, it's a complex word with what is called operationalizing the role of government. That is, getting meaningful participation by governments in this multi-stakeholder environment. And the second point, which is capacity building in our view that could benefit from the assistance of the ITU. The way forward provided by the forum and is included in the chairman's report is that through the ITU mechanisms of the council working group on internet related public policy issues, we will continue discussions on this with a view that further on, the council might examine the output from this council working group. And hopefully the issue could then again be pursued and discussed on a formal basis in some of the upcoming events of the ITU starting next year, 2014. Daniel, thank you very much. Thank you.